Leica launches limited edition versions of three classic M lenses

Limited edition versions of the Leica APO-Summicron-M 50 mm F2 ASPH, Summaron-M 28 mm F5.6 and Summilux-M 28 mm F1.4 ASPH lenses have been announced for the Leica M rangefinder series, with alternative finishes, red markings and different materials setting them out from the normal production versions.

Each of the limited editions has its distance or aperture markings picked out in red paint, and each comes in a different paint or finish to the standard models.

The lens with the most unique features is the APO-Summicron-M 50 mm F2 which comes in black chrome, and substitutes the regular focusing ring for a ‘scalloped’ version that the company says echoes the design of the 1956 model. There is a lot of brass too, with the components of the barrel made in brass, as is the lens hood and the lens cap.

The Summaron-M 28 mm F5.6 will come in a black matt paint that’s especially hard wearing, according to Leica, making it as tough as the black chrome finishes. The Summilux-M 28 mm F1.4 will come in a silver anodized finish.

Each of the lenses will be technically identical to the standard production models, just with these cosmetic differences. There will only be 700 of the 50mm lens, 500 of the 28mm F5.6 and 300 of the 28mm F1.4 – and all will be available by the end of the month. For more information see the Leica website.

Leica Camera AG presents three new design options in the Leica M-Lens portfolio.

Leica Camera AG presents new design versions of the Leica APO-Summicron-M 50 mm F2 ASPH., Leica Summaron-M 28 mm F5.6 and Leica Summilux- M 28 mm F1.4 ASPH. lenses for the Leica M-System. The special series of the three lenses are distinguished by unique design highlights and are being offered in a limited number of examples. The performance and technical specifications of the lenses are otherwise identical to those of the serial production products.

The new series of lenses includes a black chrome version of the APO-Summicron-M 50 mm F2 ASPH. standard lens. In comparison to the serial production lens, this design alternative features a characteristically scalloped focusing ring that recalls the appearance of the Summicron 50 mm F2 (II) from 1956. The components of the barrel of this special series are machined from brass. The engravings for the focal length and the distances in feet are picked out in red. The lens is supplied complete with a classic, round brass lens hood engraved with ‘Made in Germany’ and a lens cap turned from solid brass. The edition of the lens in this design version is strictly limited to 700 examples. The APO-Summicron-M 50 mm F2 ASPH. in black chrome is available from 21 February.

The second special series presents a version of the Leica Summaron-M 28 mm F5.6 in matt black paint finish, a lens from the classic line-up of Leica M-Lenses. The Summaron-M is modelled on a screw mount lens produced at the Leitz factory in Wetzlar from 1955 to 1963. With a length of less than 2 centimetres, this extremely compact wide-angle lens is the smallest lens of the M-System lens portfolio. The special paint used for this special series is particularly resistant to wear and lends the lens an appearance almost identical to that of the classic black chrome finishes.

A further feature of the new lens is the engraving of the aperture scale visible from the front, with numbers now picked out in red. This edition of the Leica Summaron-M 28 mm F5.6 in matt black paint is limited to 500 examples for the global market. The lenses will be on sale from 28 February.

The third design option, the Summilux-M 28 mm F1.4 ASPH. in a silver anodised version, offers owners of Leica M-Cameras in silver a further high-performance lens that matches the finish of their cameras. This fast wide-angle lens is an ideal companion for reportage photography and delivers impressive imaging performance in all lighting situations. The lens with the alternative finish will be on sale from 28 February in a limited edition of 300 examples.

http://3d-kraft.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=151Leica Summilux 50mm f/1.4 ASPH is not even better than Sony 55mm F1.8. It is very obvious since ALL Leica bodies have a maximum of 24 megapixels while others have more than 40 megapixels. You know why Medium format lenses are big and huge right? Same thing. You can not overcome physics. The reason for big and heavy lenses are for better optical quality Period.

HowaboutRAW/"In early 2019, the Leica M 50 f2.0 APO is the best 50mm lens in the world. Then comes the Noctilux. Then likely the Zeiss Milvus."THEN WHERE IS YOUR BELOVED IT SOURCE AND LINK? You see, your statement dont have any source and link at all. Stop ignoring real images.

"You've seen the sources cited by others in these comments. Your refusal is a matter of record. There's no question that the M 50mm APO is one of the sharpest lenses available, you'd know this if you bothered with reading testing."This is why you failed to prove it.

"Wrong lens you linked, therefore invalid. Also not lens testing, so more ignorance from you,"You are running away from facts.

"It means exactly what I said about no mirror in the path of the light to the film plane."Guess what? Leica DOES NOT consider Leica M as a mirrorless camera but DRF. They have a mirrorless camera line such as Leica SL. You also failed to prove this part.

"Again, not my failure that you refuse to read lens testing, and then start on about a Leica 50mm M not under consideration."Is this how you have a conversation in front of the court?lol

Still, no information to prove here. How pathetic manner is this? Without it, you are just giving false information to other people and that's a huge issue

HowaboutRAW/Still failed to understand the definition between DRF and mirrorless, still, no links and proofs to support your claim, public datas that you mentioned proved me right, and kept ignoring true facts.

It is your FAILURE since you NEVER listed a link and information to prove it. This is why you have a limitation of having true information to support your claim. Until you provide links or information, you always be a failure since you have nothing support your statement whether it is true or not. Wanna have the truth? Bring links and information or you will end up being a lier.

Question: I am shooting Sony R so I have absolutely no interest in using a Leica body. However, I am curious about any advantage that might be gained adapting Leica lenses to the Sony E mount body. I have read reports indicating that Leica lenses can ONLY be used on Leica bodies due to some mysterious technologies which adapt the lenses to the plane of the Leica sensor. What is going on here? Is this just bs marketing on Leica's part to keep their bodies in play? At this stage of the game I am not convinced that Leica is making lenses that surpass Zeiss or Sony, however. Not sure if it ever really matters.

These particular Leica M lenses do surpass Zeiss, Sony GM and Sigma, by a good bit.

You'll need a digital M body or an SL body.

At focal lengths 35mm and wider there are problems using theses lenses on Sony FE bodies; E bodies should be decent. But all Sony E mount bodies shoot lossy only raws. This weakness of Sony's APSC bodies may be done away with in future models.

So, there are approximately 500 people on the planet, who are going to buy the Summaron-M 28F5.6. 300 people, who are going to buy the Summilux-M 28F1.4 ASPH. And 700 people, who are going to buy the APO-Summicron-M 50F2 ASPH. How do I know that? - German Precision! :)

Actually the performance of the lens doesn’t totally determine the cost of it. There’s absolutely no doubt that a certain (large) percentage of the cost of Leica lenses is due to their exclusivity - even if they are ultra-high performing. Maybe someone can comment on what the actual cost of materials and workmanship for a specific Leica lens entails. Are some of the elements smoothed in an incredibly laborious way? Don’t you think a company with much more extensive funding and R&D could duplicate, exactly, a Leica lens and offer it at half the price?

@HowaboutRAW - "Why do you think to get away with this crap?" First of all, I did not publish this comparison. Perhaps you can enlighten us with your own side-by-side comparison or from other resources.

Still no rationale for why the lens would cost 10k except for exclusivity. There is nothing about the material or manufacturing that warrants the price. It’s basically (partly) fine-art sculpture that has value beyond the materials and labor used for its creation.The Zeiss 50 f/2.0 Makro Planar ZF is $1300. Amazing color from that lens. It’s price is way more in line with what goes into the creation of the lens (material, design, assembly).

I was hoping you or anyone who is knowledgeable could let us know why the price is 10k then (if there is indeed some actual reason for it beyond exclusivity). That was my original question. Is Leica design and material shrouded in mystery?

Also you say the 50 f/2.0 Makro Planar ZF isn’t good? Ok well that’s just your opinion. Many think it’s excellent even if it isn’t the sharpest. And it offers excellent color and an unmistakable Zeiss rendering. You keep mentioning the Leica color as a reason why they cost thousands more than other lenses of the same focal length ( other lenses that are arguably sharper, have better contrast, etc.). The only point I’m exploring is that you’re paying for a lot more than materials and performance when you’re buying a Leica lens. It’s like trying to say that a Louis Vuitton handbag is worth $2000 because of its material and construction. Simply not true.

@HowaboutRaw - What I'd shared is totally legit. The comparison clearly stated what was being compared. The person who bothers to write the blog obviously didn't think that's crap as you'd stated. According to the date, it was published back in Dec of last year. My question still stands because it's all about your personal preference and the amount of money you can afford as in the case of the used one.

@Terkwoiz - "That was my original question. Is Leica design and material shrouded in mystery?" That's the question I've been asking. I did some research and I found this most recent one. I asked several of my friends to see what they think. I got mixed feedbacks; some love the Leica softness and pop while others like the technical sharpness of the Canon...

@ HowaboutRAW - I did not make any comments about the performance of the Leica lens, not even one word. You're the one who kept on criticizing what I'd posted. I've always interested in Leica products and that website is ran by a Leica user (check out her link further before you start breathing fire on everyone.)

You apparently don’t know what goes into the making of a Leica lens because you keep dodging the topic of their materials and construction. A few other people are waiting for someone who actually knows more about Leica lenses to comment. You can focus your energy on trolling in another thread.

HowaboutRaw the singular point I’m making is that you’re paying a huge percentage extra for exclusivity when you buy a Leica lens just as you do when you buy designer items of clothing as one example. If you are truly knowledgeable about the materials and manufactuaring of Leica lenses (eg the elements are laboriously hand polished) then please enlighten everyone.

"HowaboutRaw the singular point I’m making is that you’re paying a huge percentage extra for exclusivity when you buy a Leica lens just as you do when you buy designer items of clothing as one example."

Still not paying any attention to my points I see.

" If you are truly knowledgeable about the materials and manufactuaring of Leica lenses (eg the elements are laboriously hand polished) then please enlighten everyone."

Never claimed to know what materials be used by Leica during the making and design of the best M lenses. Nor have I implied anything like that knowledge.Sad attempt there.

The only sad thing is you. Truly. People have even commented that you’re annoying to everyone on this forum and to take it easy but you even responded to that by essentially saying: “Wrong. You’re incorrect. I’m not annoying and people find my comments useful.”

It’s baffling that you can actually call another commenter on here “arrogant”. You seem like a truly depressed individual. I doubt you have a single friend.

I’ll return later to undoubtedly see your disparaging reply to this comment and that’s fine and to be expected from you. I’m in Hawaii at the moment and about to head out and enjoy some Ramen. Take it easy everyone. Mahalo!

"What makes it so difficult for a company to make a high quality knock-off of a Leica lens?"

Finally, a good question.

Leica and Zeiss, and yes others but not necessarily the usual suspects, have a much better understanding of colour and light than most other lens makers.

Right, neither Leica nor Zeiss would put a great deal of effort into engineering based on these principles for their less than high end optics.

Yes, this knowledge was available 100 years ago to any party who chose to study it.

Right, modern materials (glass and coatings) and computer control systems are relevant in that someone engineering lenses for Leica has to check these materials and systems against this different standard.

"It’s baffling that you can actually call another commenter on here “arrogant”. You seem like a truly depressed individual. I doubt you have a single friend."

So arrogance and fake concern from you too. Sad again.

"I’m in Hawaii at the moment and about to head out and enjoy some Ramen. "

So?

"Truly. People have even commented that you’re annoying to everyone on this forum and to take it easy but you even responded to that by essentially saying: “Wrong. You’re incorrect. I’m not annoying and people find my comments useful.”"

So, again?

You pulled the laughable "but Prada" analogy. Then to your credit you finally realized how dumb that was.

Isn’t the question, what do you like to shoot with? I will say that I’ve shot with Nikon, Zeiss on both Contax and Hasselblad, Nikor large format, and Leica. I haven’t gotten familiar with my Linhof yet. The Leica 35mm R was the sharpest and most appealing contrast lens I have shot with. It was really beautiful. What do you like to see out of a lens? As my photography professor liked to say, you learn to see through your camera. What do you see?

HowaboutRAW - I come across your comments once in a while in the past, but it doesn't sound like the old you, because you sounded more immature and impulsive...Anyhow, my post is going stay and there isn't much you and I can do about it. I would suggest you divert your opinions about this comparison to the blogger. After all, she does have a comment section at the bottom. I'm sure you will find her interesting; she's a hardcore Leica fan....

@Terkwoitz: price is not only determined by materials or salary/purchasing/development/company internal or marketing costs, but especially by branding reasons. You also pay for the name on it. From a business/company point of view, this is absolutely ok. If it a question of calculating the best "break even". How many are willing to pay that price.If only one person would pay 1 Billion for it, this is better than to price it 1 Thousand and sell it to 100. As easy as that. It is not a mass product, where you compete against other companies. Leica defines itself through exclusiveness and craftmansship. And of course there are some buyers for whom having a Leica is some kind of a show-off to others ;) (and Leica can live with that, as long as they sell, fair enough).I don't care about exclusiveness and couldn't afford it, so I stay with other brands that make people pay me for my photos from time to time :).

HowaboutRAW/ "I see you be still ignoring the published lens testing on the Leica M 50mm f/2.0 APO [and the 50mm Noctilux]" And where is your proof?

You see, this is very pointless as you comment without any information and proofs to support your claim. This is how people troll in here. Since then, I never trust anyone without information and proofs like you.

If you gonna continue this conversation, bring links, proofs, and information or otherwise, you just playing and trolling.

HowaboutRAW/ Then PROVIDE YOUR PROOFS AND LINKS. Without them, you are talking about pointless information. Since I already tried Leica M lenses and SL lenses, I CAN NOT TRUST YOUR STATEMENT. OR perhaps you are a Leica user that you never tried Sigma, Sony GM, and Zeiss lenses that you feel your Leica is superior to those lenses? And Im talking about real image tests. You are ignoring physical size to overcome the high megapixel.

HowaboutRAW/"I very much prove that you don't care about facts and data you can readily check."

By speaking that Leica is better? Gosh, I dont need your verbal proofs. I demand physical proofs and information. Since you are not trying to provide any proofs and information, I. feel that you are failed to support your claim since the beginning. I know you are a Leica user with proud but at least you need to give us real images to prove it.

HowaboutRAW/ Why do you ask me to check public data? This is YOUR CLAIM. That's why you need to prove it. And how do you even know if you tested your lenses correctly? Stop runaway from this conversation. As a result, you still have nothing to support your claim after all.

HowaboutRAW/ And where is your fact to support your claim? Where are they? How many times do I have to say this? This is why I hate those people commenting on anything WITHOUT information and proofs because they make false information so easily.

"This is why I hate those people commenting on anything WITHOUT information and proofs because they make false information so easily."

You're free to keep speculating about false data as long as you don't look up the cited lens testing. See how your refusal to face facts means that you get to stay in you own low information bubble, where anything you assert equals the validity of anything else--since you've not read anything else.

Whereas, I can point you to public data, and at the same time be secure in what my raws and negatives tell me about what the best Leica lenses can do.

The sad thing for you is that there are easy to find Noctilux raws, ones you keep ignoring. Right, there aren't samples shot with a highend Canikon at the same time.

HowaboutRAW/ "Not according the various lens tests. You also seem to think there's only one type of Leica lens. Is there only one type of Sony FE mount lens?" According to what tests lol. You see, you have no data and proofs to support your claim here.

"Sigma lenses don't come close to the best from Leica."YOU STILL HAVE NO PROOFS FOR YOUR STATEMENT. Where is your official test data? You are ignoring physics in here and you just prove yourself being wrong again.

Right, lol, you've not followed up on cited tests and data. Again not my failure, but yours.

"YOU STILL HAVE NO PROOFS FOR YOUR STATEMENT. Where is your official test data?"

You really should read the test results before continuing to flail.

"You are ignoring physics in here and you just prove yourself being wrong again."

Hardly, but that's a separate ignorance of yours.

Beyond what useful lens tests measure and affirm about the best Leica lenses (and these are on the list of best Leica lenses) there are things about colour/and light that the tests don't measure yet. That's why you'll need raws. As I said, there are some easy to find Noctilux raws.

"Right, lol, you've not followed up on cited tests and data. Again not my failure, but yours."

"You really should read the test results before continuing to flail."

From DXO and Lensrental? Then Leica lense is not better than Sigma and Sony GM.

"Hardly, but that's a separate ignorance of yours."This is YOUR ignorance. Do you even know why medium format lenses are much bigger and heavier? This is a trend to make lenses much bigger and heavier like Sigma lenses in order to supper high megapixel and edge to edge sharpness.

"Beyond what useful lens tests measure and affirm about the best Leica lenses (and these are on the list of best Leica lenses) there are things about colour/and light that the tests don't measure yet. That's why you'll need raws. As I said, there are some easy to find Noctilux raws."I tell you this. Leica Summicron is the only lens with high sharpness and yet too expansive. Other leica lenses are outdated base on RAW file that Im seeing.

"From DXO and Lensrental? Then Leica lense is not better than Sigma and Sony GM."

You need to start by not making general comments about Leica lens[es]; the claim regards specific ones. Clearly you've not read the citations.

"This is YOUR ignorance. Do you even know why medium format lenses are much bigger and heavier? This is a trend to make lenses much bigger and heavier like Sigma lenses in order to supper high megapixel and edge to edge sharpness."

We went over this (or perhaps it was someone else ignorant of Leica digital Ms) and I answered by asking a question: How are the M and SL significantly different than say a Sony A7RIII?

"I tell you this. Leica Summicron is the only lens with high sharpness and yet too expansive."

Generally Leica Summicron lenses aren't the subject here. There's more than one 50mm Leica M Summicron. A specific one is the subject.

No one disputes that Sony, Sigma, and Canikon, can make sharp lenses. But sharpness ain't all.

" You need to start by not making general comments about Leica lens[es]; the claim regards specific ones. Clearly you've not read the citations."You are accepting your failure I guess?

"We went over this (or perhaps it was someone else ignorant of Leica digital Ms) and I answered by asking a question: How are the M and SL significantly different than say a Sony A7RIII?"M and SL has 24mp while A7R3 has 42mp. Ring a bell?

"Generally Leica Summicron lenses aren't the subject here. There's more than one 50mm Leica M Summicron. A specific one is the subject."Because other than Summicron, they are not sharp but way expansive.

"Apparently it's news to you that Leica makes more than one 50mm M lens.

There are 2 50mm Summicrons. You've clearly not read the tests.

You seem to think that the Noctiluxes are type of Summicron."

I already checked Leica website duh. There are APO APSH Summicron and just Summicron. DO you really think that Im stupid or what?

"Wrong difference, and nowhere near significant. Very telling that you're counting megapixels in 2019. More gear ignorance from you."Gosh, YOU are the one being ignored. Bigger megapixels require better optics to support edge to edge sharpness. Dont tell me that 24mp and 42mp are similar lol. Tell me why 50mm F1.4 film lens is much smaller than Zeiss FE 50mm F1.4?

"Again saying you've not read the tests, and you're still confused by the fact that there's more than one M Summicron."Excuse me, I checked all tests including both APO APSH and normal version. Stop fooling me. How come Leica made a much bigger version of 50mm F1.4 for edge to edge sharpness?

HowaboutRAW/ "In early 2019, the 50mm Leica M f/2.0 APO is the best 50mm in the world. There's not some dispute about this."THEN PROVIDE PROOFS AND LINKS. YOU CANT EVEN SUPPORT YOUR OWN CLAIM. You are ignoring the best samples in here.

"Both the SL and M bodies are mirrorless."HAHAHAHA. What a stupid information. Leica M IS a Digital Range Finder NOT a mirrorless camera. You dont even know what is means MIRRORLESS camera right? Go to B&H and try to find Leica M series. NONE of them say mirrorless instead of digital rangefinders. Even Leica consider Leica M as a DRF NOT mirrorless.

Excuse me, I totally doubt your statement WITHOUT proofs. Why am I trust your false information since you cant even support what you are saying? At least I provided direct information while you couldn't. This is your limitation of worthless information. Feel bad? Bring evidence and information.

Real ugly that you'd uphold SHB as a standard bearer of truth and more than adequate references.

But after all you did pull that "lying in the street" crap elsewhere, so you're not the most thoughtful.

The 50mm M APO from Leica is well understood to be the best 50mm full framed lens in the world in early 2019. The tests are there, others have cited them.

No amount of lili23 saying "look at the f/1.4 Leica M" and "Sigma's great" vitiates anything I've said here. It's real telling that lili23 has had to lie about what Leica M 50 is under consideration--real telling too that you'd agree with someone of that ilk.

HowaboutRAW/"You can read the testing of the Leica 50mm APO. That you refuse to read this publicly available data is not my failure."LMAO. Where is your source again? Gosh you dont have one anyway.

"You've referenced the wrong Leica M 50mm --this was already well established."Not even established but you are ignoring.

"Rangefinders are mirrorless bodies; since there is never a mirror in the lens to film plane path."RF is not even close to mirrorless bodies. You didn't even learn anything from camera history. Leica already confirmed their bodies are DRF NOT mirrorless.

"You're not interested in facts, but it sure looks like when fact challenges you, you move to discuss other gear."Where are your facts that you are talking about? I brought proofs and yet you kept telling me false information WITHOUT supportive information.

A classic Gucciotti racing bike was thrown out in my block therefore Leicas in the street are plausable in better neighborhoods. You said you see a lot of Ms on the street. So I thought you meant as trash.You meant they weren't just lying there? I always have a hard time trying to figure out what the heck you mean.

Yes, "Right" meant you agreed with me I presume. Or all of the Leica stuff you write is sarcasm then? Hard to tell with you. If so kudos for the commitment to put everyone on. Bravo! I bet the trash collectors in your town are super rich.

My Grandfather had a Duessenberg. He trade his Ford for it because the guy could no longer afford to drive it during the depression. Neither could my grandfather. But, he was an engineer. So he could keep it going. Beautiful stuff. It’s sort of sad to see people dis Leica. The lenses are amazing.

As to why Leica insists on making what seems to many ridiculously silly versions - Because, when you have a manufacturing facility like the one in the second link, well then, it's because you can. Why not? :)

Totally agree. That link of mine was just to address the techno-wankers who want to see line pair comparisons and such. Remember, also, the resolving power is amazing all the way to the corners from most of their lenses,.

I agree about the color fidelity of their lenses as well For example, the sharpness fall off of my 50 APO LHSA is hard to explain without actually experiencing it. It doesn't seem like a f2.0. Color from their lenses and the M cameras are another thing. Leica just makes such amazing optics and more importantly, systems.

I've had a Canon system with their best lenses and loved the 80mm 1.2 and the 24-70 2.8. As well, really amazing optics. So many great lenses out there.

Leica is hard to compare to other systems because they are so unique. Other systems (like my Canon) is equally hard to compare to Leica because of their amazing lenses and the complete system they provide with everything from flash to AF to amazing zoom lenses.

So in this visual medium where we judge with our eyes... they are hard to compare and show how the images they produce are unique? Something you can't explain without experiencing it? Is this a feeling you get when using it, or can the unique experience be shared in the photos?

Alan - Correct. It is hard to explain with words. I can if you would like. I can go on and on with words here but, you are correct - You really need to see photos or better yet experience the lens yourself.

I don't agree with the last part you wrote that Leica evokes poetry and such. Maybe you are pulling my leg here?

Short version, from the Lens Rental tests: "When you consider the Summilux is doing this at f/1.4 you see why some people are willing to pay a premium for it. It’s at least as good, and perhaps a bit better, at f/1.4 as the other lenses are at f/2."

Since I have little need or desire to shoot at 1.4, that would not be a compelling reason for me and thus would not improve my images. Shallow dof is not my style in general. I occasionally use a Canon FD 1.4 on my APS Sony for low light shots. And those shots are for fun and don't pay the bills. The sharpness is going to be offset by the reality of hand holding at 1/15th and slower. Especially when you consider Leicas are not stabilized.

I can see why some others might care about having a great 1.4 experience, but the practical use of that is overrated IMHO.

It's like selling furniture or exotic cars.. They don't aim to sell in mass.. All they need is to sell to limited people to make enough profit to make profit. If you think it's too expensive for you, then you are not the client they are aiming for.

Photodesignch. We all get this but some make the argument that the performance of Leica gear is what matters. As I said before if the gear didn't say Leica on it, few would pay that much for the performance alone. There are a few aspects of the M and some of the lenses that make them compelling enough despite the name. But the rest is mystique. Nothing wrong with that especially if the lenses hold their value and you have the money. In many ways Leica is very smart. They pulled off a terrific turnaround. They just are not targeting the working photographers that built their reputation.

If we knew that each individual lens was hand tested and calibrated to be within the design tolerances, then one might say the price is justified. Do we know that or is it just implied by long standing reputation?If testing is done by random sampling as is normal then the lens is worth no more than any other quality lens. We have to remember that every lens of a particular model is different. How different depends on the rigor of the manufacturing quality control and that costs big bucks.

Linhof cameras used to mount Zeiss, Schneider, and Voightlander lenses in "Linhof" Compur shutters. They were claimed to be individually selected and approved... each lens came with a test negative that Linhof shot through it. These lenses sold for just a bit more than the standard versions.

Pentax did that too! only their "limited" is affordable and one of the best craftsmanship. Operates both in Auto or manual focus. According to Pentax who are still making them today, "limited" meaning "limited quantity per production cycle" thats all....

I have no issues with Leica's pricing, most people would question why any non-pro would spend more than a few thousand dollars on camera equipment and they must be nuts to have spent over $10,000. or $20,000. for a camera hobby. I've shot with Leica's many times over 50 years and it is a fine camera line to use, I don't own one, never will, I have always owned what I want in cameras, but I put my extra cash into cars, 69 Shelby GT 500, 73 Pantera, 67 Jaguar 3.8 S Type and my daily driver an SL63. Others wonder why anyone needs a $30,000 fishing boat, does it get you bigger fish, maybe.So, everyone spends their money as they want, but some who can't afford a Leica or other expensive items need to dump on those who do, very sad.

And of course cost far more than a Noctux (the two current most expensive M lenses from Leica) then you have to pay to maintain that Type S, etc. Whereas the M once owned doesn't cost anything for upkeep.

I stay away from the car claims. I just point out that people spend $25000 on a pair of 8 foot speaker cables for highend audio systems. Then replace those cables with something better in 5 or 10 years. Or now, in 2019, a "just" $40,00 turntable and arm, sans cartridge, is just a mid-highend turntable for records.

I agree that Leica's don,t go in for service, they last forever, even the ones that are used often. They feel great in your hand and the focus is unlike any other, like my Nikon S2 compared to any current Nikon, I do have the Df that I love, but the Leica's are very special. Too many here can't use a camera without AF, over 100,000 iso, 10 fps, 999 segment meter, f1.4 primes and f2.8 zooms, how did I,/we ever take photos 50 years ago with ASA 80 color film.All the cars are numbers matching, the GT500 and Pantera have had full restorations, the Jag's wiring has been replaced, their biggest issue. I like to work on the Jag and purchased a hoist for the garage when I added the Jag as I knew I'd be under it often, all Jag,s should come with a hoist😉.All the cars are driven, not just for show.

I've seen a guy working on his Type S on the streets of my city. Obviously he's not hoisting the engine out. The body is in very good condition, and he clearly drives the car. I've seen it more than once.

Not all Leica gear has a great durability rep. For example the S lens' gear drive.

The M9's sensor, if you kept in in a damp environment, or cleaned it too often, would corrode because of hydrophilic cover glass.

I've not read of any big complaints about the SL and Q.

Being able to shoot at ISO 12,000 is a big deal, it opens up non-flash colour photo opportunities that simply didn't exist as recently as 15 years ago--whether or not you shot digital.

The Leica's I've used over the decades have all been M rangefinders and digital M the last decade, I have a few friends who when we get together end up handing me their Leica and comment 'Now you have a good camera to use until we get together again', they're hoping I'll buy one someday, they may be correct in that. I still shoot film, 4x5 b&w. Old school. I enjoy driving and working on the Jag the most.

Yes everyone spends their money as they want. But marketing numerous limited editions to target collectors has absolutely nothing to do with advancing the art of photography.

If Leica did not have these collectors, they might be out of business because the performance of the lenses and bodies would not justify the price for enough photographers to turn a profit. Competing on the merits alone might not work for them. (E.g. if their gear said "Argus" on it, what prices could they get?)

In Silicon Valley where I live, dropping $10K on a bicycle is pretty common. I stick with my 20 y.o. "cheap" bike ($3K new, now a vintage classic), but the allure of a newer, "faster" bike is always in the air. It's just the way humans are.

Howaboutraw...please tell me where you live. I want to collect some of those Ms and Fujis that are lying in your streets. I now understand your perspective if your neighbors are so wealthy they discard their expensive cameras.

I'm sorry old chap but you're ruining these threads with all this defensive nonesense.....it is incredibly boring and assuming you actually are a Leica owner you are making us other Leica owners look like a right bunch up-tight chumps without a sense of humour.......and believe me that is one thing one has to have to spend that much wonga on a camera. I'm an M10 user; I love my Leica kit.....yep it was expensive, can I justify it monetarily? Nope! Why did I buy it then......because I can!

When DPR put up Leica news I enjoy reading the comments section, all the Leica haters moaning about cost and lack of features......it makes my day, I laugh and laugh.......'cos they just don't get it.

So please Mr Raw stop taking the bait and lets just enjoy the comments, however ill-informed, for what they are, thanks in advance.

"I'm sorry old chap but you're ruining these threads with all this defensive nonesense."

Nonsense. Why is it that when someone doesn't like what better Leica lenses can do, it becomes "nonsense"?

"I'm an M10 user; I love my Leica kit.....yep it was expensive, can I justify it monetarily? Nope! Why did I buy it then......because I can!"

I've barely said anything about the M10 here. The subject is largely these Leica M lenses. Do you own a Noctilux? Or do you own the 50mm f/2.0 APO M? If not, I really don't care what you have to say about your M10, which is not an M lens.

Oh dear, oh dear, Mr Raw, you're at it again......do I have a Noctilux?......who cares whether I have one or not.....

I don't wish to criticise but apart from being on the thin-skinned side, you also don't seem very socially aware.....may I suggest you read 'How To Win Friends and Influence People' by Dr Dale Carnegie, a brilliant book explaining human relations in a way the average bloke (like you and I) can understand.

......I'm not being sarcastic old chap, read it and see......it will change your life.......and then we can all enjoy the comments in these Leica threads without having to wade through your bile......thanks in advance for your cooperation.......

Wow......you've trumped yourself with that one.......well done, it's got it all hasn't it......all the features we've come to expect from a post by HaventaclueAboutRAW.

Here's an idea, why not save up all your frustrations and just do a summary post once a week.

That way you are not only regularly relieving the obvious mountain of stress you carry around in a structured way but we can also enjoy some Leica threads during the rest of the week without having to wade through your, err, let's be kind 'pearls of wisdom'.....

SL Mount for Leica unfortunately spells GIANT overpriced zooms, we have plenty of those natively. Every pro mirrorless shooter I know has used, and more importantly loves at least a couple of those jewel like M's on their MILC's. Check out your motion unit stills guys, they love them, as do documentary shooters.

I'll take a wager with you, put up your best shot on that 90-280 SL and I'll raise it with something from a Sony 100-400GM. It's all become really academic, nothing but charts and internet lore, nothing to see comparing any of these zooms, too much glass, too much lost in transmission in all that glass, they're all too similar.

I've yet to see anything worthy of that price tag shot on any of those SL zooms. If you cannot see the different in print, it simply isn't there.

There is a magic in the simple lens formulas, and Leica hold some of the best patents in their lens catalogue, those are what Leica do the best.

The Leica 90-290 is better for colour. Obviously a different focal length.

"in print" can mean a lot of things. Even a glossy fashion magazine has nothing prints compared to a good inkjet run. But correct, you should be able to see the difference in a fashion magazine "print", not a newspaper "print".

In the analogue Kodachrome world, "the Leica [colour] look" held water. But not in the digital world, too many other factors in play now.

What's missing from most all (I'll give FUJI a pass here) manufactures catalogues are a good range of primo primes. Leica get this point, but only where cinematographers are concerned, the Leica Cine lenses are universally regarded.

We can talk in circles all day about *image viewing aesthetics* but at the end of the day, my original point holds, Leica is a lens company with delusions of making a functional digital camera worthy of their glass.

Does every Leica lens have the same image color characteristics? If so how is this possible with countless versions, formulas, different glass, and different coatings over many decades? And in what way does this differ from all other lenses ever produced?

If only the best Leica lenses have this special color or colour quality, are the rest just ordinary despite their price? Do my clients have the ability to perceive this on their computers, tablets or phones? The biggest issue I have in reproducing color is caused by the limited spectrum in some interior lighting... not by my equipment.

I had 40 and 50 Zeiss lenses for my Rollei 6006 The 40 was so cold I needed to shoot with a warming gel for the chromes to match my other Zeiss lenses or my Schneider Super Angulons and Rodenstock Grandagons.

The screens that my clients use are often overly saturated and contrasty compared with my calibrated NEC monitor that is my reference. This and the simple variety and numbers of devices masks color subtleties and cancels out any chance I would have the slightest hope of "improving" the color in my images by using the few very expensive Leica lenses that you claim have some special ability to transmit color in a better way to a color separation filter set.

BTW, I shoot tethered to a computer and can instantly see how my system is reproducing colors of the scene in real time...not later based on how I remember it. As I said, the only issue I have is with the spectral characteristics of some light sources. My cameras and lenses are fine.

If Leica can make 17and 24 TSE lenses coupled to a camera with a 40+MP sensor that would work better in light that actually lacks the colors needed to reproduce the scene more faithfully, I'd be interested. Until then I don't need what you are selling Howabouraw.

Yes Howard the kind of color you are talking about can't be put back with filters or processing because it exists in your mind not in reality.

FWIW digital files on screen are comprised of red, green, and blue pixels of various brightness levels. Every one of these spots can independently be adjusted in post even if that requires painting in the color with a brush.

BTW, I shoot home and commercial interiors for a living. Hundreds of them a year. I also ran a custom color printing lab at one time. And I studied color perception and color printing at RIT. And my color vision tests very highly. So I feel confident in my process.

"I wonder if Leica will ever try their hand at what they do best, lens manufacturing. Come on Leica, take on Zeiss, offer your optics in other mounts"-----------------------Now stop arguing all over these forums all day long, and go make some fracking pictures to brighten your drab existence! FFS man.............

I wish I had the Leica's M10 and all three of these lenses! Then, If I did, I could sell all of them, get a real camera (Sony A7III), 2 GM zooms, 3 GM primes, go on a nice long vacation and still have plenty of money left over. I'd also get better IQ, DR, EVF, 5-axis IBIS, AF joystick, EyeAF, better battery capacity, flexability, videos, articulated LCD, etc...

@Snapper2013, I was thinking of asking H the exact same question, but you worded it perfectly. Trust me, H cannot and will NOT be able to answer your question definitively. Anything he comes back with will be only his unsubstantiated and purely subjective opinion, trust me on that. With no website gallery, except 4 pictures on DPR, no gear list, it looks like he is still shooting with a Canon G2 P&S. Sony GM lenses are THE cream of the crop when it comes to high quality lenses.

@snapa Plenty of proof on the internet on what a top quality lens delivers, including Leicas. When you start shelling out that sort of money it's about a look the lens gives. Sigma make some nice glass, but character isn't a word most would use to describe them. Character transcends optical performance because character is noticeable across different media

Your flailing at my having posted jpegs from a Canon G2 shows your general and broad lens ignorance. In 2016, terms it would be akin to posting disparaging remarks about the lens on the Ricoh GR II, only the Canon has a better jpeg engine. Right, the Ricoh is much better for higher ISOs.

Or another example would be disparaging the Panasonic LX5--owned that too.

Then you've demonstrated that you don't have a grasp on the meaning of the compound noun "gear list".

@ H, 1) Since you like talking about Leica cameras and lenses so much, do you own any of them, or have you ever owned any? If yes, which Leica cameras and lenses do you own?2) Have you upgraded your Canon G2 or Panasonic LX5? If yes, to what?3) Have you ever posted or shared any pictures on DPR, or anywhere else?BTW, you never answered my question, which was, can you substantiate you claim that Leica lenses are better than Sony GM lenses? No, because you can't, thanks for nothing. As they say, talk is cheap.

I did read you gear list which says:Other gear:Leica F1.0 Noctilux (Canada)Leica M 75mm F1.4 (Canada)It does not include a camera? Also, what is FL of your F1.0 lens? You can't fill out a gear list completely or correctly. Also, when it says "Other gear", that would mean you had other gear, which you don't list, so it makes no sense :/

Someone at the time compares the Fuji x100 with the Leica x and the result is that it is nearly impossible to tell which is which. Leica used to be mythic, it is nomore. New lenses offer much more contrast than old lenses (those dedicated to m3, m4) and have nothing in common with the new lenses that have today less magic. Re color rendition, may I say that this is also a question of software.

"Someone at the time compares the Fuji x100 with the Leica x and the result is that it is nearly impossible to tell which is which. Leica used to be mythic, it is nomore."The Fuji X100 is not a lens. And also it doesn't have a lens of the focal length released here.

I note you don't say what Leica M lenses was used for the comparison.

So you've not made a legit point.

Then, no, from personal experience Fuji's best lenses (the X100's is not one) don't come close to Leica's best lenses.

"New lenses offer much more contrast than old lenses (those dedicated to m3, m4) and have nothing in common with the new lenses that have today less magic."

You don't know much about Leica M lenses.

"Re color rendition, may I say that this is also a question of software."

@ H... If you had a gear list full of Leica cameras and lenses with a gallery full of pictures taken with them, you would have a lot more credibility. As it is, the only thing you provide is hundreds of your opinions, with no evidence to back any of them up.Why is it that you feel so strongly about Leica lenses, and feel the need to tell everyone how great they are?

They have just invested in Light (L16) with Google. L16 might not be anyhting to write home about (https://www.l16.us/) but the technology is interesting. Imagine a marriage of Leica optics and Light/Google computational imaging power...

"The red dot has nothing to do with the shape of an M rangefinder and the placement of the VF."

What on earth has this to do with my post? No, I really don't know anything about M rangefinders, that is if you wish to discount my M3 and M6, which I've owned for years. And these are in addition to a 1c, 2x IIIf, Leicaflex, SL2 and R7. So, to save you the trouble commenting, I know absolutely nothing about Leicas, either.

"It is just a little depressing that a company like Leica resorts to branding and marketing instead of designing new and better products."

This release includes a redressed version of the optically best 50mm full framed lens in the world. (Right, you'll need a Leica digital M or SL to get the most out of it.)

As for newer Leica cameras: The SL and CL are both excellent. And in early 2019, the TL2 is the only Android GUI based ILC on the market. Before you, "but the Zeiss ZX1 is about to ship" do look up "ILC".

And the TL2 sells for Leica. V3 needs a built-in EVF, but unlike the discontinued Galaxy NX, a real Android tablet, the TL2 doesn't need more buttons and dials.

Leica has also announced an upcoming S3 for the S system, no official release date yet.

3 years after its release, the Q continues to embarrass the Sony RX1RII as a stills camera.

Leica has been making special editions for a long time (check out the Wikipedia page for the Leica M6).It's a good and totally legitimate revenue stream for them. It would be depressing if that was all they did, but reality is far from that.

Leica today is certainly much more innovative than Leica at the time of the M6. It's important to have reasonable expectations. They are a tiny company compared to something like Canon or Sony.

The current digital Leica M is as big as the film-ones, so I don't get your "it's so big" point.

And of course they are constantly designing better products and trying to improve them. They announced the TL2, the S3, SL and Q successors are on the way and also their M line is upgraded regularly. For their size they do a lot and try a lot. Not all of it works out but they do make unique products (like the X-U).

No, I meant that the TL2 was announced a while ago (as a successor to the TL), as was the S3. Also SL and Q successors are on the way (see rumors).

Leica X-U can still be bought here in Europe and is listed on their homepage. It's possible that they won't continue it and that it wasn't a successful product, but it certainly was worth trying since there is nobody offering a large sensor rugged camera at the moment.

Also in an interview a while back they mentioned they are going to produce L-Mount cameras in different, smaller form factors.

Leica are a brand, and they leverage that brand recognition, probably because it provides better returns than trying to make break through new products. That's why they have their own stores and now are flogging things like headphones, bags etc. Who wants to buy a Canon labelled shoulder bag?

HowaboutRAW - pointless for me to get a 50 cron APO as I prefer 35mm, but that 28 summaron has got me thinking (I may get the regular version as I use them not collect them). I bought into Leica to stop me from the constant upgrade and equipment swap I've done for many years, and in context (yes a strange context it is) it will actually save me money in the long term.

Panasonic does do glass all companies that collaborate take and give ideas to one another you are just a elitist snob just as not all Leicas are made in Germany nor is all the components of lenses. The collaboration with Panasonic stretches backto the early days of digital, old Leica lenses are medoicre on digital great for film, Ido own Leica gear and still use film along with digital. No I am not referring to mft

Panasonic doesn't do the glass for the SL zooms, even if Panasonic does the tubes.

But the subject here isn't SL lenses. It's very high end, all German Made, M lenses. Right, Leica also makes M lenses, SL, and S lenses, in Portugal. Not news.

"The collaboration with Panasonic stretches backto the early days of digital, old Leica lenses are medoicre on digital great for film, Ido own Leica gear and still use film along with digital."

Panasonic was never known to be a lens maker or designer. Leica is and was.

Minolta (Konica-Minolta now) is rumored to be doing some of the AF S lenses engineering, but that likely doesn't include the glass. And Konic-Minolta is a well established lens design firm, unlike Panasonic. No, KM didn't go away with the sale of the camera division to Sony. K-M just doesn't have a retail camera division any longer.

You are Leica ignorant. Panasonic ignorant. And lens general ignorant.

Sorry you just don’t understand the the relationships between sensors electronics and lenses. The Germans have learnt a lot from the Japanese in all glass technology. We are not talking about direct making it is about the technology employed and used. The M8 was a real hack job aswas their collaboration with fuji but Leica has learnt from its mistakes and produced some fine cameras since though the m line lags somewhat. Lenses for digital cameras are not produced in isolation ,

Llens technology has moved on and seem to have a overly simplistic view on manufacturing we use a lot of lenses in our manufacturing and the technology ownership and manufacture process is no what you presume it is. Leica does not own all its technology Bye and have a nice life believing that the wheel was invented by Leica

"Llens technology has moved on and seem to have a overly simplistic view on manufacturing we use a lot of lenses in our manufacturing and the technology ownership and manufacture process is no what you presume it is."

And I'm not talking about lens technology, that's a subject you inferred. I'm talking about lens results.

Nor am I referencing lens manufacturing.

"Leica does not own all its technology Bye and have a nice life believing that the wheel was invented by Leica."

Again, not talking about lens tech. But Leica certainly owns the M lens technology. No beliefs involved. Right, Leica didn't invent the primary principles it uses to design and build its very highend lenses.

I gave you a big hint, which I labeled clearly, that you flail on about more "up to date" tech is not my failure.

I don't really pay much attention to which Leica lens or variant costs how much.

But I guess the 50/2 is something like Leica M's universe variant of the exotic telephotos of the other brands.

Still just yesterday I was looking at an ad for f/1 Noctilux for 6 grand in excellent condition. Even that sounds more justifiable. Considering the M lenses are so simplistic, even decades old lenses are still good and many have the brand gestalt.

So making more new fifties for 10 grand seems to be like trying to make a hyper-luxurious sub-brand on top of a already luxurious brand with a rich used market. That didn't work well for say, Mercedes/Maybach and again a 50-year old Leica lens is much newer than a 5-year old car.

Even forgetting the cheap beginnings of Leica, it would be pretty cool to have a digital CL. I know everyone is crying for them.

Yes I meant a budget digital RF with M mount. Whether it's Leica or not I don't care.

Well modern lenses are certainly sharper with better controlled aberations, but whether it's Leica or Sigma or Nikon, the price hike is more than equivalent. And in the case of latter 2 (as well as pretty much everyone else), the difference in size and weight is usually enormous.

I generally prefer small, cheap lenses even if they come with some compromises. If they can also be fast, even better. Of course I don't print billboards and don't need to pixel peep at 48 Mpx. Many people have these preferences, and the older lenses are ideal not only for their prices, but also for their look and feel, both external and image-wise.

Think about it. You need a hundred $100 bills to buy that APO Summicron-M 50mm F2 lens. But a $100 bill is just printed paper with virtually no intrinsic value. Its value is symbolic, established by a social convention. In the same way, Leica lenses are today basically symbols of value. Who manufactures real lens is Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Fuji, Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, Zeiss, etc, not Leica.

Leica have luxurized themselves into a high fashion brand, much like the mechanical Swiss (or 'originally' Swiss) watch industry has. As much as it doesn't make sense to moan about the price of a gold Rolex when your phone tells time more accurately for free, it is useless to compare Leica to other more 'functional' brands on price.

Leicas are great camera's, Patek Phillipes are great watches (I think?). If you want them and have the money, buy them. If you just need a good quality photo or just need to know what time it is, perhaps look somewhere else.

Lars V. The rationale is money. Leica is, after all, a capitalist company and their position in the market makes them uniquely placed to successfully market such products. I can't think of another camera manufacturer which has the marketing pull to get away with it.

@Raw: Mechanical watch afficionados would probably not agree with your statement - several watches will undoubtedly do things no other watch or time-telling machine can. But non-afficionados just don't care about those differences, think they are too minute to bother, or believe they just don't justify the price or other performance deficiencies.

The Leica Q2 is a fixed-lens, full-frame camera sporting a new 47.3MP sensor and a sharp, stabilized 28mm F1.7 Summilux lens. It's styled like a traditional Leica M rangefinder and replaces the hugely popular original Leica Q (Typ 116), launched in 2015.

Fujifilm's GFX 50R takes the image quality from the existing 50S model and wraps it in a new body with new controls and a lower price of entry. Is that enough to tempt you to pick one up for yourself? Find out how the GFX 50R performs in our full review.

The Mavic Air hits the sweet spot for many drone users, combining compact size with high performance and good image quality. Find out what makes it so useful, and why it might just be the best travel-friendly drone on the market today.

Latest buying guides

If you're looking for a high-quality camera, you don't need to spend a ton of cash, nor do you need to buy the latest and greatest new product on the market. In our latest buying guide we've selected some cameras that while they're a bit older, still offer a lot of bang for the buck.

What's the best camera for under $500? These entry level cameras should be easy to use, offer good image quality and easily connect with a smartphone for sharing. In this buying guide we've rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing less than $500 and recommended the best.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Sony mirrorlses cameras in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Whether you've grown tired of what came with your DSLR, or want to start photographing different subjects, a new lens is probably in order. We've selected our favorite lenses for Canon DSLRs in several categories to make your decisions easier.

Montana judge Dana L. Christensen has ruled the Republican National Committee did not infringe upon the copyright of photographer Erika Peterman after they took a photo from a Democratic candidate's Facebook page without permission and altered it to use in a derogatory promotional mailer.

Leica recently announced the Q2, a digital rangefinder with a fixed 28mm F1.7 lens. It's a heck of a lot of fun to shoot with, but is it right for you? Based on our time with the camera, and its specifications, we've examined how well-suited it is for common photography use-cases.

Now that our Panasonic Lumix S1R has final firmware, we couldn't wait to get out shooting with it - and we also tried the high-res mode, which combines files to get 187 megapixel images. Because sometimes, 47 megapixels just isn't enough.

Drones can be useful tools in urban areas, where they're utilized for everything from news reporting to building inspections, but flying in these areas requires careful preparation. Here's what you need to know to do so safely.